NO

[newn]

NO

 

[PabloTeK]

The only real difference is that the 65W is more energy effecient.

 

[elitehacker]

Get an Intel CPU, AMD cpus are just not worth it. They are getting creamed out there.

 

[porterjw]

Not sure about pros/cons of that AMD, but Intel D-series are reliable. However, then tend to run 'hot', but if you do your research and build your system right, you'll be fine. And by 'hot' I mean they Idle in the 30's*C range rather than the 20's.

 

[StrangleHold]

Between a Pentium D 3.2 and a Athlon 64 X2 5200, the X2 5200 is the better processor.

 

[konzerte]

why its better? ( i just wannt to know )

because of this:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=914&model2=889&chart=424

 

[porterjw]

The Motherboard you selected is for AMD CPU's, not Intel.

 

[lovely?]

for the price that AMD processor has not been beaten by Intel because Intel is interested in high performance and AMD is very good for budget builds

 

[Jet]

for the price that AMD processor has not been beaten by Intel because Intel is interested in high performance and AMD is very good for budget builds

I'm really confused by that statement. Yes, AMD has done a good job in the low end with performance compared to Intel. However, Intel's low end processors are some of the best performance/value deals in history currently. So, we're taking the 5200+ against the E4500. Same price, and same performance.

Overclocking? The E4500 would totally cream the 5200. 3.0Ghz is easily achievable with the stock cooler.

Take it another way: You can save money and get the E2160, and overclock that to suit your needs and save another $50. It wouldn't be quite as good with video editing (compared to the 4xxx series), but it would still be amazing.